Steve Cotter says: Kettlebells is the ultimate endurance training tool
“The unique advantage of Kettlebells is that it combines endurance with strength and power. Generally endurance, strength and power are trained as separate entities - not at the same time. To train all three components, most systems use a variety of tools and equipment,” says Steve Cotter, founder and director of the International Kettlebell and Fitness Federation (IKFF). “The Kettlebell is a single tool that can train all three important components of strength, power and endurance at the same time”.
While strength training is about short duration training, at a high intensity, the endurance athlete sustains effort for a prolonged period of time – up to an hour or more.
So how best to train for endurance?
“The classic lifts of clean and jerk and snatch would have to be the foundation of any Kettlebell-based endurance training programme,” says Cotter.
Here’s Steve Cotter’s recommendation for the ideal endurance training programme:
A four-day-a-week programme focusing on double Kettlebell jerk on two days and single Kettlebell snatch on the other two days .Round out the jerk training with squats or jump squats. Round out snatch training with heavy one-arm swings or farmer’s hold for maximal time.
One day per week use Kettlebell and bodyweight exercises for general physical preparedness (GPP) conditioning with a variety of exercises that train all ranges of motion and planes of motion such as: Cleans, presses, horizontal, rowing, bottoms up gripping, push-ups, pull-ups, Good mornings, and hanging leg raises or other abdominal exercises.
Three to four days each week, run for between 20 and 40 minutes at the end of your training session. And remember to stretch the major muscles of the body for a minimum of 10 minutes after each session.
I've been watching the European weightlifting championships a bit the last few days on Eurosports, and also I noticed the oly lifting thread. So I figured why not make a thread for kettlebells as well. The connection between oly lifting and kettlebells might not be obvious to a lot of people, as kettlebells are mainly a fitness tool in the west (and a bit of a fad as well) but kettlebell sports lifting is very established in the ex-Soviet countries and is starting to spread and gain popularity across the world.
Just like Oly lifting, the two main events in kettlebell sports are clean&jerk (called Long cycle) and snatch. Unlike Oly lifting, the lifts are preformed over a 10 minute period and the goal is to do as many repetitions as possible without putting the weights down. At the most serious competitions, men lift 2x32 kg (2x70 lbs) and women lift 24 kg (53lbs). Traditionally, women have only done snatch, and men have either done Long cycle or Biathlon, which combines 10 minute snatch with one bell and 10 minute jerk with two bells, with at least a 30 minute rest between the exercises.
I watched two videos, but I didn't quite grasp the real thing behind them. For example, some observations from European kettlebell lifting championship: -It's clearly much about endurance and way less about strength. All of them seem to be performing the kettlebell movements reasonably easily. -They don't seem to be in any particular hurry to do their movements. Is it most jerks in 10 minutes wins or something? -I personally have trouble being interested in the 'kettlebell sport' because it looks sorta like running a marathon. Sure, you are fricken awesome for running the marathon under 3 hours, but I dont want to watch you run for 3 hours. Shorter, great feats of strength are more impressive to me. -The people in the videos are without doubt fit and lean, but they aren't big and they don't look strong. But I guess this is also a sports specific thing. If it's more about endurance, you probably dont even want huge muscles.
If my observations are wrong, then I'll be glad if you point them out.
whatever keeps (or gets) you fit is the best workout/hobby for you. And it doesnt surprise me if many find kettlebell training more fun too. Regardless, it is naive to brush off anything except barbell training as bad, and I don't mean to spark such discussion.
I'm pretty sure I said that the goal of the competition is most reps over a 10 minute period. So a rep is counted by good fixation of the weights at the top of the lift.
You're right about some of your observations though. Kettlebell lifters don't get big like powerlifters or the heavier oly lifters - but they aren't stringy like marathon runners either, especially at the upper weight classes.
The reason they don't look like they're in a hurry is because you'll burn out extremely quickly if you go too fast. 6 lifts a minute with 2x32 kg is very good, 8 reps a minute elite, and only a handful of people can do more than that.
Why it looks easy is because they are very technical exercises where you benefit from good technique to improve efficiency. There's also an element of rest in the rack position which is hard to explain, but you can basically hold the weight on your frame without taxing your muscles, by connecting your elbows to your hips. This allows a lifter to pace himself. But that doesn't mean it's easy or that they aren't strong. To put it in perspective, these guys lift on average about 3840 kg total overhead during a 10 minute period (60 reps)
Here's Ivan Denisov, who's frame looks more like a traditional oly lifter, lifting 2x40kg
Regarding KB sport as a spectator event, I think it actually works very well if you get a situation where two or more guys are going head-to-head all the way to the finish. Since it's only 10 minutes, and you can get no-counts for bad lifts, it can get very exciting. Here's one of my coaches from a competition a few years back - unfortunately the camera never really catches that there's a really competitive race going on, since the guy he's really competing with is outside of the camera fram. But it might give an impression of what it's like when the guy you're rooting for is constantly trading lead position with another guy in the same heat.
Interestingly, Finland is one of the first countries outside of Russia where kettlebell sports is organized under the Finnish weightlifting organization - so they've definitely recognized some sort of kinship between the two sports. Basically, KB sport is the endurance-over-duration version of Oly lifting
Kettlebells are an awesome fitness tool and great for overall conditioning, SPECIALLY for powerlifters/weighlifters. The swing is really easy on joints as it has no impact and at least for me it had in the past a great carryover to the deadlift (RKC swings though)
I do think kettlebell is mostly for intense conditioning though, 3-10min time intervall. I think its great for some sports, like mma, boxing or 7 seven rugby if you tailor it a bit.
My company brought them to Chile as pioneers, we still sell them as our best product. Won't link my site cause tl would crash it though lol.
Also it tilts the shit out of me how crossfiters swing.
Also once attended a ikff cert with steve cotter. My impression of him was the he was an awesome lifter and a great teacher, but the cert structure and the complexity of the lifts made it impossible for ppl to really perfect their technique (too many ppl, not enough time for feedback)
The great thing about kettebells is how you can move them, unlike dumbbells. In all these videos, however, I didn't grasp how using kettlebells was an improvement over dumbbells or the ability to swing was used to cheat the movement.
On April 14 2013 13:49 Jerubaal wrote: The great thing about kettebells is how you can move them, unlike dumbbells. In all these videos, however, I didn't grasp how using kettlebells was an improvement over dumbbells or the ability to swing was used to cheat the movement.
It's hard to explain, but it's nothing like dumbbells. I mean, you can do clean and jerk or snatch with dumbbells, but you can't do the swing, dumbbells don't fit around your hands the same way kettlebell handles do and you can't rack them like you can with kettlebells. It's its own thing entirely. I don't really see how a swing is "cheating." After about 6-7 minutes when your grip is failing, it certainly doesn't feel like you're cheating. It's a ballistic movement, not a resistance training movement where you're isolating specific muscle groups - it's like saying you're cheating when you do a second dip when you jerk a barbell in olympic weightlifting.
I love KB's! We use them pretty often in CrossFit, but it's usually just swings. They're absolutely amazing for a full body workout.
I do have a question about the form they use in these videos. When they're snatching: after they complete the movement and they're ready to bring the weight down to start the next lift, why do they do the knee bend? It seems like a pretty unstable position to get into, but they all do it so it must be proper form. I guess it protects the shoulder more than bringing the weight infront of you when it's overhead? I don't know, wondering if you guys do.
On April 15 2013 06:54 ElvisWayCool wrote: I do have a question about the form they use in these videos. When they're snatching: after they complete the movement and they're ready to bring the weight down to start the next lift, why do they do the knee bend? It seems like a pretty unstable position to get into, but they all do it so it must be proper form. I guess it protects the shoulder more than bringing the weight infront of you when it's overhead? I don't know, wondering if you guys do.
the knee bend isn't something everyone does, but it's for efficiency and conservation of energy.
My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
To each their own. There's a few things mentioned above you can't use dumbbells for due to the swing/turnover. I guess you could make an argument for it not building much chest muscle but i'm sure its great for shoulder/triceps.
Guy at my old gym used to do all sorts of kettleball tricks/throws/catches and what not with 24kg kettlebell. Pretty impressive stuff but i'll stick to my barbell snatches and cj's ^^
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
To each their own. There's a few things mentioned above you can't use dumbbells for due to the swing/turnover. I guess you could make an argument for it not building much chest muscle but i'm sure its great for shoulder/triceps.
Guy at my old gym used to do all sorts of kettleball tricks/throws/catches and what not with 24kg kettlebell. Pretty impressive stuff but i'll stick to my barbell snatches and cj's ^^
i'm talking about pure effectiveness, not taste. u can swing with dumbbells, you can't turnover maybe but that has no function anyway.
On April 15 2013 06:54 ElvisWayCool wrote: I do have a question about the form they use in these videos. When they're snatching: after they complete the movement and they're ready to bring the weight down to start the next lift, why do they do the knee bend? It seems like a pretty unstable position to get into, but they all do it so it must be proper form. I guess it protects the shoulder more than bringing the weight infront of you when it's overhead? I don't know, wondering if you guys do.
the knee bend isn't something everyone does, but it's for efficiency and conservation of energy.
Ah I guess that makes sense. Still doesn't look like the safest position to get into, but I guess if your shoulder and low back stay straight, it shouldn't hurt you in any way. I wish I had my own KB's sitting around my house, they're such a fun workout.
On April 18 2013 01:36 decafchicken wrote: It does actually. At least in barbell olympic lifts the turnover/spin of the bar can be very important.
ok let me rephrase, the turnover/spin by itself doesn't help you develop your phisique in any way.
You know that about 90% of the posters here are strength trainers though, right? Most of them aren't body builders and don't seek to get as ripped as possible, especially if it's detrimental to their lifts.
Obviously most people don't mind looking better after they do tough workouts, but as far as I know, most people here aren't looking to just look better.
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
Not true. You can do similar things, but there are major differences that you discover once your get to a certain level of practical experience. Dumbbells are too clumsy to swing, you can't rack them in the same way, and because of the way the you thread your hands in through the handles on kettlebells, pushing them overhead isn't the same either. You literally can't do longcycle with "regular weights" let alone do it better.
You're right about some of the limitations of kettlebells though, there are very few effective pulling motions you can do, and no real chest workout either. But here's the thing, kettlebells aren't supposed to substitute traditional weightlifting exercises - it's a different thing entirely. It's a tool to train strength, conditioning and endurance at the same time. I still do dumbbell stuff, as well as dead lifts, squats and pull ups.. and 20-30 minutes jog after every workout as well
On April 18 2013 01:36 decafchicken wrote: It does actually. At least in barbell olympic lifts the turnover/spin of the bar can be very important.
ok let me rephrase, the turnover/spin by itself doesn't help you develop your phisique in any way.
By turnover, I assume you mean the clean? In which case, you're wrong here too. Try doing a 10 minute clean set with two kettlebells at a challenging weight and a reasonably high frequency - your grip will get fried, your arms and biceps will get extremely tired, same story for your legs. And you'll be near max heart rate almost the entire set
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
Not true. You can do similar things, but there are major differences that you discover once your get to a certain level of practical experience. Dumbbells are too clumsy to swing, you can't rack them in the same way, and because of the way the you thread your hands in through the handles on kettlebells, pushing them overhead isn't the same either. You literally can't do longcycle with "regular weights" let alone do it better.
You're right about some of the limitations of kettlebells though, there are very few effective pulling motions you can do, and no real chest workout either. But here's the thing, kettlebells aren't supposed to substitute traditional weightlifting exercises - it's a different thing entirely. It's a tool to train strength, conditioning and endurance at the same time. I still do dumbbell stuff, as well as dead lifts, squats and pull ups.. and 20-30 minutes jog after every workout as well
On April 18 2013 01:36 decafchicken wrote: It does actually. At least in barbell olympic lifts the turnover/spin of the bar can be very important.
ok let me rephrase, the turnover/spin by itself doesn't help you develop your phisique in any way.
By turnover, I assume you mean the clean? In which case, you're wrong here too. Try doing a 10 minute clean set with two kettlebells at a challenging weight and a reasonably high frequency - your grip will get fried, your arms and biceps will get extremely tired, same story for your legs. And you'll be near max heart rate almost the entire set
i'm not talking out of my ass, i took a full kettlebell training course in the local gym, and i made this opinion afterwards. i think it's pretty redundant with regular weight training and i like that because i can do that at my own pace and can do much more different exercises.
you have the right to like it of course, but i'm pretty sure regular weight training is just cheaper and more convenient and more effective even.
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
Not true. You can do similar things, but there are major differences that you discover once your get to a certain level of practical experience. Dumbbells are too clumsy to swing, you can't rack them in the same way, and because of the way the you thread your hands in through the handles on kettlebells, pushing them overhead isn't the same either. You literally can't do longcycle with "regular weights" let alone do it better.
You're right about some of the limitations of kettlebells though, there are very few effective pulling motions you can do, and no real chest workout either. But here's the thing, kettlebells aren't supposed to substitute traditional weightlifting exercises - it's a different thing entirely. It's a tool to train strength, conditioning and endurance at the same time. I still do dumbbell stuff, as well as dead lifts, squats and pull ups.. and 20-30 minutes jog after every workout as well
On April 18 2013 02:34 hastur420 wrote:
On April 18 2013 01:36 decafchicken wrote: It does actually. At least in barbell olympic lifts the turnover/spin of the bar can be very important.
ok let me rephrase, the turnover/spin by itself doesn't help you develop your phisique in any way.
By turnover, I assume you mean the clean? In which case, you're wrong here too. Try doing a 10 minute clean set with two kettlebells at a challenging weight and a reasonably high frequency - your grip will get fried, your arms and biceps will get extremely tired, same story for your legs. And you'll be near max heart rate almost the entire set
i'm not talking out of my ass, i took a full kettlebell training course in the local gym, and i made this opinion afterwards. i think it's pretty redundant with regular weight training and i like that because i can do that at my own pace and can do much more different exercises.
you have the right to like it of course, but i'm pretty sure regular weight training is just cheaper and more convenient and more effective even.
Considering the opinion you formulated, chances are it's was a bullshit course. There are so many unqualified people giving instructions on kettlebells, it's hilarious. You can't do the sport lifts with dumbbells, it's that simple.
On April 17 2013 20:57 hastur420 wrote: My problem with kettlebell is that everything you do with it you can do with dumbbells too. literally everything. what on earth is the motivation then to pay the kettlebell trainer... people read too much into this, it's just a bunch of explosive exercises, nothing else.
also too many of them effect your back and lower back, like half of the exercises, and not enough of them do effect the chest and legs and triceps. you can get a good physique with kettlebell and it's good to burn fat because it's intensive if you do it well, but nothing you can't do better in a standard gym with regular weights.
Not true. You can do similar things, but there are major differences that you discover once your get to a certain level of practical experience. Dumbbells are too clumsy to swing, you can't rack them in the same way, and because of the way the you thread your hands in through the handles on kettlebells, pushing them overhead isn't the same either. You literally can't do longcycle with "regular weights" let alone do it better.
You're right about some of the limitations of kettlebells though, there are very few effective pulling motions you can do, and no real chest workout either. But here's the thing, kettlebells aren't supposed to substitute traditional weightlifting exercises - it's a different thing entirely. It's a tool to train strength, conditioning and endurance at the same time. I still do dumbbell stuff, as well as dead lifts, squats and pull ups.. and 20-30 minutes jog after every workout as well
On April 18 2013 02:34 hastur420 wrote:
On April 18 2013 01:36 decafchicken wrote: It does actually. At least in barbell olympic lifts the turnover/spin of the bar can be very important.
ok let me rephrase, the turnover/spin by itself doesn't help you develop your phisique in any way.
By turnover, I assume you mean the clean? In which case, you're wrong here too. Try doing a 10 minute clean set with two kettlebells at a challenging weight and a reasonably high frequency - your grip will get fried, your arms and biceps will get extremely tired, same story for your legs. And you'll be near max heart rate almost the entire set
i'm not talking out of my ass, i took a full kettlebell training course in the local gym, and i made this opinion afterwards. i think it's pretty redundant with regular weight training and i like that because i can do that at my own pace and can do much more different exercises.
you have the right to like it of course, but i'm pretty sure regular weight training is just cheaper and more convenient and more effective even.
Considering the opinion you formulated, chances are it's was a bullshit course. There are so many unqualified people giving instructions on kettlebells, it's hilarious. You can't do the sport lifts with dumbbells, it's that simple.
no.
there isn't a single thing you can't do with regular gym tools that kettlebell does, muscle development and focus wise. most of the stuff you can do exactly form-wise too. there isn't anything special about kettlebell.
Seriously? Are you trolling? Show me someone doing a correct long cycle with dumbbells. Someone who has actually handled both regular weights and kettlebells would never come to that conclusion. Anybody who is using kettlebells properly isn't using them as if they're an analogue to dumbbells anyway.
The core movements of the kettlebell snatch and clean&jerk don't look or feel anything like dumbbell movements. Just going by how different the center of mass is between a kettlebell and a dumbbell, it's obvious they aren't the same thing.
The swing alone is something you can't replicate with dumbbells. You basically can't swing two 24kg dumbbells between your legs, because there is no room. You can't rack dumbbells the same way as you do kettlebells, because of how the kettlebells rest on your arms. You don't get the rotational aspect of locking out a kettlebell overhead with dumbbells, because of the center of mass and rotational aspect this entails. There's a major component of stabilizing and fixating the kettlebells overhead after a jerk, that is very beneficial for the small muscles in your shoulders, that you simply don't get when you hold dumbbells overhead, because the center of mass is inside your hands.
It's fine that you don't like kettlebells, but you're talking out of your ass. Your one course at your local gym obviously didn't make you an expert on this.
EPT
